400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON DC 20202-2600
www .ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by
fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
June 28, 2017
Honorable Kathryn Matayoshi
State Superintendent
Hawaii Deparmtent of Education
P .O . Box 2360
Honolulu, H awaii 96804
Dear Superintendent Matayoshi:
I am writing to advise you of the U. S. Department of Education's (Department) 2017
determination under section 616 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA ). The
De partment has determined that Hawaii needs assistance in implementing the requirements of
Part B of the IDEA. This determination is based on the totality of the State’s data and
information, including th e Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2015 State Performance Plan/Annual
Performance Report (SPP/APR), other State -reported data, and other publicly available
information.
Your State’s 2017 determination is based on the dat a reflected in the State’s “2017 Part B
Results -Driven Accountability Matrix” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for
each State and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicators and other
comp liance factors;
(2) a Results Matrix that includes scoring on Results Elements ;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Compliance Score and the Results Score ; and
(5) the State’s Determination.
The RDA Matrix is further explained in a document, entitled “How the Department Made
Determinations under Section 616(d) of the Individuals with Di sabilities Education Act in 2017:
Part B ” (HTDMD).
OSEP is continuing to use both results data and compliance data in making determinations in
2017, as it did for Part B determinations in 2014, 2015, and 2016. (The specifics of the
determin ation procedures and criteria are set forth in the HTDMD and reflected in the RDA
Matrix for your State.) In maki ng Part B determinations in 2017, OSEP continued to use results
data related to:
(1) the participation of children with disabilities (CWD) on regu lar Statewide assessments;
Page 2—Chief State School Officer
(2) the participation and performance of CWD on the most recently administered (school
year 2014- 2015) National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP);
(3) the percentage of CWD who graduated with a regular high school diploma; and
(4) the percentage of CWD who dropped out.
You may access the results of OSEP’s review of your State’s SPP/APR and other relevant data
by accessing the SPP/APR module using your State -specific log -on information at
osep.grads360.org. When you access your Sta te’s SPP/APR on the site, you will find, in
Indicators 1 through 16, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the State is
required to take. The actions that the State is required to take are in two places:
(1) actions related to the correction of findings of noncompliance are in the “OSEP
Response” section of the indicator; and
(2) any other actions that the State is required to take are in the “Required Actions” section
of the indicator.
It is important for you to review the Introduction to the SPP/APR, which may also include
language in the “OSEP R esponse” and/or “ Required Actions ” sections.
You will also find all of the following important documents saved as attachments to the Progress
Page:
(1) the State’s RDA Matrix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spr eadsheet entitled “2017 Data Rubric Part B,” which shows how OSEP calculated the
State’s “Timely and Accurate State- Reported Data” score in the Compliance Matrix;
(4) a document e ntitled “Dispute Resolution 2015- 16,” which includes the IDEA section 618
data t hat OSEP used to calculate the State’s “Timely State Complaint Decisions” and
“Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions” scores in the Compliance Matrix; and
(5) a Data Display, which presents certain State- reported data in a transparent, user-friendly
manner and is helpful for the public in getting a broader picture of State performance in
key areas.
As noted above, the State’s 2017 determination is Needs Assistance . A State’s 2017 RDA
Det ermination is Needs Assistance if the RDA Percentage is at least 6 0% but l ess than 80%. A
State would also be Needs Assistance if its RDA Determination percentage is 80% or above but
the Department has imposed Special Conditions on the State’s last three IDEA Pa rt B grant
awards (for FFYs 2014, 2015, and 2016), and those Special Conditions are in effect at the time
of the 2017 determination.
The State’s determination for 2016 was also N eeds Assistance. In accordance with section
616(e)(1) of the IDEA and 34 C.F.R. §300.604(a), if a State is determined to need assistance for
two c onsecutive years, the Secretary must take one or mo re of the following actions:
(1) advise the State of available sources of technical assistance that may help the State
address the areas in which the State needs assistance and require the State to work with
appropriate entities;
Page 3—Chief State School Officer
(2) direct the use of State -level funds on the area or areas in which the State needs assistance;
or
(3) identify the State as a high -risk grantee and impose Special Conditions on the State’s
IDEA Part B grant award.
Pursuant to these requi rements, the Secretary is advising the State of available sources of
technical assistance, including OSEP -funded technical assistance centers and resources at the
following website: https://osep.grads360.org/#program/highlighted- resources
, and requiring the
State to work with appropriate entities. In addition, the State should consider accessing technical
assistance from other Department -funded centers such as the Comprehensive Ce nters with
resources at the following link:
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/newccp/index.html . The Secretary
directs the State to determine the results elements and/or compliance indicators, and
improvement strategies, on which it will focus its use of available technical assistance, in order
to improve its performance. We strongly encourage the State to access technical assistance
related to those results elements and compliance indicators for which the State received a score
of zero. Your Sta te must report with its FFY 2016 SPP/APR submission, due February 1, 2018,
on:
(1) the technical assistance sources from which the State received assistance; and
(2) the actions the State took as a result of that tech nical assistance.
States were required to submit Phase II I of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP ) by April
3, 2017. OSEP appreciates the State’s ongoing work on its SSIP and its efforts to improve results
for students with disabilities. We have care fully reviewed your submission and will provide
feedback in the upcoming weeks. Additionally, OSEP will continue to work with your State as it
implements the second year of Phase III of the SSIP, which is due on April 2, 2018.
As a reminder, your State mu st report annually to the public, by posting on the State educational
agency’s (SEA’s) webs ite, the performance of each local educational agency (LEA) located in
the State on the targets in the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days aft er
the State’s submission of its FFY 2015 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review LEA performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each LEA “meets the requirements” of Part B, or “needs assistance,” “needs
intervention,” or “nee ds substantial intervention” in implementing Part B of the IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each LEA of its determination.
Further, your State must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it on the SEA’s
web site. Within the next several days, OSEP will be finalizing a State Profile that:
(1) will be accessible to the public;
(2) includes the State’s determination letter and SPP/APR, and all related State and OSEP
attachments; and
(3) can be accessed via a URL unique to your State , which you can use to make your
SPP/APR available to the public .
We will provide you with the unique URL when it is live.
Page 4—Chief State School Officer
OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts to improve results for children and youth with disabilities
and looks forward to working with your State over the next year as we continue our important
work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their families. Please contact your
OSEP State Lead i f you have any questions, would like to discuss this further, or want to request
t echnical assistance.
Sincerely,
/s/ Ruth E. Ryder
Ruth E. Ryder
Acting Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Director of Special Education